1803–1804
ProofBankruptcyDefamationAfter he obtained a discharge from his creditors, the pursuer brought an action against James Marshall, alleging that he had defamed the pursuer’s character. The defendant sustained that the pursuer was fraudulently bankrupt and thus, he affirmed that the pursuer's creditors were defrauded. The pursuer's petition was refused, because he based his claim on a private conversation between the defendant and Robert Jaimeson, one of his creditors. The Court held that conversation was not relevant to prove the claim of the pursuer.
Documents in this case (3)
- Stein v. Marshall — Petition, 1 Sep 1803Petitioners challenge an interlocutor’s refusal to grant their bill of advocation, alleging James Marshall maliciously defamed Stein to obstruct creditor consent.
People & places in this case
People involved
- James Stein — Pursuer
- William Inglis — Trustee/Tutor/Representative for Pursuer
- James Marshall, Esq. — Defender
- Robert Jamieson, W.S. — Named in case documents
Places
Where this case took place
Published Reports
William Morison, The Decisions of the Court of Session (1811), pg. 12443, , pg. Proof App. Pt. 1 P. 1